We are well past the point of no return when it comes to developers relying on upscaling. Even Final Fantasy XVI goes down to 720p render resolution on a ps5 in performance mode and uses upscaling. If you watch Unreal Engine developers interviews and such, the engine itself is made with upscaling in mind so pretty much every UE5 game that will come out will use upscaling.

Luigi's Mansion 4 is my most wanted switch 2 game.

I don't know i hear lot of mixed impressions on this tech so far UE5 has been a mess.

I don't like UE5 either, that's for sure. But a lot of big developers will be using that engine. We will see what happens with the big titles but if I have the choice between Native or Upscaling, I'll choose Native everyday. But Native is becoming less of an option as newer games come out.

Can DSLL actually run consoles properly though? it uses AI and it seems like it needs a VRR display to get the proper benefits from it since the framerates will be all over the place.

If the rumours are true, on the Switch 2, DLSS can work but not on PS5/Xbox Series consoles. But RDNA 3 has a lot faster Ai acceleration so it wouldn't surprise me if when the PS5 Pro comes out, they add in FSR with Ai upscaling for the PS5 Pro. But we will have to wait and see though.

watch at 59:00 for 2 minutes DF says you need  a VRR display to actually use DSLL, and it's useless with vsync.

Just want to point out that the "AI" part of DLSS doesn't happen on the gaming platform, but the super-computer that trains the model.

Auto-encoders are pre-trained. 

The small inference computation is really no different than computing any other matrix multiplication. 

A small number of tensor cores and then the RT cores preform this computation. 

There is an argument to be made that it is mainly the RT cores and not the tensor cores because a 4090 has the same proportional penalty as a 2060, despite having many more, and more efficient tensor cores. 

There is no reason an Nvidia chip with an Turing or more recent architecture can't run DLSS 2.0.

We've also seen with XeSS, which also uses deep learning, that you don't need specialized hardware to run these sorts of models. It just helps to have it.

I watched it and he is talking about Frame Generation. DLSS has 3 different methods:

DLSS 3 Super Resolution
DLSS 3 Frame Generation
DLSS 3 Ray Reconstruction

DLSS 3 Super Resolution which is upscaling doesn't need any base frame rate to look good.

DLSS 3 Frame Generation needs a high base frame rate to look good. That is what they are talking about.

DLSS 3 Ray Reconstruction doesn't need base frame rate either but you still need a strong GPU.

People can use DLSS 3 Super Resolution for upscaling without needing to use Frame Generation or Ray Reconstruction.

The Steam Deck does run FF7 Remake Intergrade with most/all of the PS5 effects intact. So you are already wrong and now forced to retreat on that whole "only a PS5 can do that! A portable could never do it!". The Steam Deck version doesn't even utilize any kind of resolution scaling from what I see. 

So now you are at the point of admitting "most next gen games" will indeed run on the Switch 2, which also by extension basically is an admission that FF7 Remake Intergrade will indeed likely run on a Switch 2 with the PS5 lighting effects largely intact, just running from a lower native resolution. 

Which is ALL that report about FF7R Integrade and Switch 2 ever claimed. Not my problem you flipped out and got triggered by that. 

It's an opinion I call out because it's ONLY for Nintendo hardware do you have jerk offs who are coming into every thread and trying to downplay every potential aspect of hardware that might be a positive for Nintendo. You don't have PC fanatics coming into PS5 threads shit talking and trying to drown out enthusiasm for that hardware? You know why? Because they're not idiots. 

By the way the fucking universe doesn't revolve around only a PS5 and PS4 right? There are variances and many different hardware types that are well outside of that narrow and biased metric. The Switch 2 doesn't "have to be just a PS4!" just as the Switch is not "just a PS3". The Switch itself is not in the XBox 360/PS3 tier but nor is it fully in the PS4/XB1 tier either, you can't say "it's just a PS3". The Switch is actually extremely close to PS4/XB1 generation, moreso than people like you would probably ever admit. 

If you gave the Switch 1 DLSS type upscaling to reduce the pixel load it has to render and the 20nm process wasn't crap, so the chip could comfortably full clock to its full 500 GFLOP potential, just those changes alone would start to push the gap between a XBox One and Switch a lot freaking closer. 

This is why I was always dubious about a Switch Pro because a Switch even doubled in horsepower totally tips it into a system that can just flat out run any PS4/XB1 game with minimal fuss so you'd have an issue of possibly a ton of ports 3rd parties can suddenly make easily and those games not being available to people who don't have the Pro model. If a Switch Pro (2x the current Switch) existed a game like Witcher 3 could run comfortably at like 600-720p undocked and 720-900p docked with increased graphics effects.